@fitcat: ""David" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:<email_address>
<quote>
You would say the same thing about any study, no matter how perfectly
designed and implemented, if it contradicted your forgone conclusions.
=========================================================
Which to some extent is understandable, given the CorPirate influence, aka 
corruption, in science.
Science started going precipitously downhill after Watson stole the Nobel 
Prize from Pauling.
 Mebbe Watson thought Pauling already had enough of them??  LOL
This is why you don't understand science, you will never be a
scientist/researcher, and you are an enemy of rational thought and
discourse.
===========================================================
Some people do shoot themselves in the foot.
In Gohde's case, I suspect he's hobbling around on two prosthetics.
But, ultimately, science has become an act of consensus, which is a pretty 
embarrassing state of affairs  if not outrageous, almost intolerable.
And not even consensus.  We, the unwashed and ill-read Pubic, are asked to 
vote blindly.
And it's not just the health sciences that suffer from this, either.  It has 
crept into math and physics, as well.
String theory is a perfect example, and 
<url> is another .
Physicists, like the inescapable Michio "media hound" Kaku, would rather 
young college educated Groupies, than any real truth.
And of course, there was Cold Fusion.
What was stunning about Cold Fusion is not that Pons/Fleishman commited a 
mega experimental faux pas, it's that assholes all over the country 
*continued* to replicate their results for years afterwards!!!
Which kept the subject somewhere in the first 5 pages of the NYTimes for two 
full years.
Oh, and Global Warming.
I have no real opinion on Global/Gorbal Warming, just shocked that a 
worldful of goddamm PhDs cain't figger out how to use a goddamm thermometer. 
Oh, yeah, and the corporate thing....
Even pure mathematics bemoans the peer-review process.
So even tho Gohde himself may not reasonable or entirely rational, his 
*paranoia* is  or at least it's understandable.
Some of the nutrients really are inneresting, in this regard:
   Just how wrong can the NIH/IOM be, ito RDAs??
I wouldn't be surprised if not only was much of this supplement-slamming 
research the result of corporate influence, but also that the NIH/IOM was 
attempting to save face.
If you are familiar with some of the literature that the 2006 DRI ignored, 
in its determinations/literature reveiws, you might be shocked.  European 
RDAs might shock you further  often MUCH higher than ours, not by %, but 
by FACTORS.
And of course, some supplement-slamming may be correct.
But who's to know?
One of the reasons this mess persists is because studies  even relatively 
simple ones  can be EXTRAORDINARILY difficult to evaluate, barring any 
obvious/inherent flaws that allows them to be dismissed out of hand..
This topic alone is the subject of semester-long required courses in grad 
school.
But, an awful possible truth may be that the raw scientific (ostensible) 
quality of a study may be far secondary to the Q of who the researchers are 
in fact affiliated with.  If this can even be determined....
Ultimately, those who "control the information"  information being both 
True Facts AND  False Facts  control us.  Likely by design.
I suggest buying stock in Preparation H.
But I would actually just use plain ole Vaseline  or the 99c store 
version  as not only is it the primary ingredient in the very overpriced 
Prep H, it works just as well.
I keep a 1# jar in every room, by every phone and TV.  I'm thinking of 
inventing an automatic applicator.  I should get rich.
EA "
    @fitcat: "Oh, a little known factoid:
"Big" scientists have publicists/PR people, agents, and lawyers, like sports 
stars.
Pons/Fleishman got into so much trouble because they press-released the 
paper pre-maturely.
Agents will finagle things like top-floor corner offices, more secretaries, 
etc.
Oh, yeah, and of course minimal teaching responsibilities.  Dats what grad 
students are for...
EA
"Existential Angst" <email_address> wrote in message 
news:4ee493d4$0$13526$<email_address>
<quote>"
{'source': 'USENET', 'other_information': '{"reply_count": 1, "forum_name": "sci.med.nutrition.20140726.mbox"}', 'file': 'data/output/usenet-sci.med.parquet'}